Ferrell v. Williamson , 83 F. App'x 541 ( 2003 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 03-7119
    GARY PAUL FERRELL,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    MARK WILLIAMSON, Warden,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
    District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief
    District Judge. (CA-02-162-1)
    Submitted:   December 10, 2003         Decided:     December 22, 2003
    Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
    Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Gary Paul Ferrell, Appellant Pro Se. Dawn Ellen Warfield, OFFICE OF
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia,
    for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Gary Paul Ferrell, a state prisoner at the time he filed his
    petition under 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2000), seeks to appeal the
    district court’s order denying relief on his petition.                   The order
    is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
    certificate of appealability.          
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    (c)(1) (2000).             A
    certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial
    showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”                       
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    (c)(2)    (2000).     A    prisoner   satisfies       this   standard    by
    demonstrating     that   reasonable        jurists    would     find    that    his
    constitutional     claims    are    debatable   and    that    any     dispositive
    procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or
    wrong.   See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 
    537 U.S. 322
    , 336 (2003); Slack
    v. McDaniel, 
    529 U.S. 473
    , 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 
    252 F.3d 676
    ,
    683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and
    conclude   that    Ferrell    has    not    made     the   requisite      showing.
    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny Ferrell’s
    motion for appointment of counsel, and dismiss the appeal.                       We
    dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
    are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
    argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-7119

Citation Numbers: 83 F. App'x 541

Judges: Motz, King, Hamilton

Filed Date: 12/22/2003

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024